KWEB vs. KBUF

Last updated Jul 18, 2026

KWEB (KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF) and KBUF (KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF) are both exchange-traded funds - KWEB is a China Equities fund tracking the CSI Overseas China Internet Index, while KBUF is a Options Trading fund actively managed by KraneShares. KWEB is passively managed, while KBUF is actively managed. Over the past year, KWEB returned -20.35% vs -5.80% for KBUF. Their correlation of 0.94 suggests significant overlap in exposure. KWEB charges 0.70%/yr vs 0.95%/yr for KBUF.

Performance

KWEB vs. KBUF - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) and KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF (KBUF). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, KWEB achieves a -21.26% return, which is significantly lower than KBUF's -11.11% return.

KWEB

• 1D: -2.44%
• 1M: 5.63%
• 6M: -24.92%
• YTD: -21.26%
• 1Y: -20.35%
• 3Y*: 2.29%
• 5Y*: -12.28%
• 10Y*: -0.22%

KBUF

• 1D: 0.67%
• 1M: 2.70%
• 6M: -13.82%
• YTD: -11.11%
• 1Y: -5.80%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

KWEB vs. KBUF - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	-21.26%	23.55%	23.85%
KBUF KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF	-11.11%	18.04%	15.85%

Correlation

The correlation between KWEB and KBUF is 0.95, indicating a strong positive relationship between their price movements. Combining them offers limited diversification - they tend to fall together during downturns.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.95
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Feb 8, 2024	0.94

The correlation between KWEB and KBUF has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.94 to 0.95 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

KWEB vs. KBUF — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

KWEB

KWEB Risk / Return Rank: 4
KWEB Sharpe Ratio Rank: 3
KWEB Sortino Ratio Rank: 4
KWEB Omega Ratio Rank: 4
KWEB Calmar Ratio Rank: 5
KWEB Martin Ratio Rank: 5

KBUF

KBUF Risk / Return Rank: 6
KBUF Sharpe Ratio Rank: 6
KBUF Sortino Ratio Rank: 5
KBUF Omega Ratio Rank: 5
KBUF Calmar Ratio Rank: 7
KBUF Martin Ratio Rank: 7

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

KWEB vs. KBUF - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) and KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF (KBUF). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

Values are calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. Risk-adjusted metrics are more stable over longer periods — use the period switch above to explore them.

	KWEB	KBUF	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	-0.74	-0.44	-0.30
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	-0.97	-0.54	-0.43
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	0.89	0.94	-0.04
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	-0.49	-0.28	-0.22
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	-0.97	-0.59	-0.38

KWEB vs. KBUF - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current KWEB Sharpe Ratio is -0.74, which is lower than the KBUF Sharpe Ratio of -0.44. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of KWEB and KBUF, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Drawdowns

KWEB vs. KBUF - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum KWEB drawdown since its inception was -80.92%, which is greater than KBUF's maximum drawdown of -21.14%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for KWEB and KBUF.

Drawdown Indicators

	KWEB	KBUF	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-80.92%	-21.14%	-59.78%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-41.62%	-21.14%	-20.48%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	-41.62%	—	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	-67.58%	—	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	-80.92%	—	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-68.99%	-16.36%	-52.63%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-35.55%	-4.84%	-30.71%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	21.01%	9.81%	+11.20%

Volatility

KWEB vs. KBUF - Volatility Comparison

KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF (KWEB) has a higher volatility of 8.34% compared to KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF (KBUF) at 3.58%. This indicates that KWEB's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than KBUF based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	KWEB	KBUF	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	8.34%	3.58%	+4.76%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	20.26%	10.37%	+9.89%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	27.55%	13.23%	+14.32%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	47.59%	14.21%	+33.38%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	40.01%	14.21%	+25.80%

KWEB vs. KBUF - Expense Ratio Comparison

KWEB has a 0.70% expense ratio, which is lower than KBUF's 0.95% expense ratio.

Dividends

KWEB vs. KBUF - Dividend Comparison

KWEB's dividend yield for the trailing twelve months is around 7.82%, less than KBUF's 8.45% yield.

Position	TTM	2025	2024	2023	2022	2021	2020	2019	2018	2017	2016	2015
KBUF KraneShares 90% KWEB Defined Outcome January 2026 ETF	8.45%	7.51%	3.53%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%	0.00%
KWEB KraneShares CSI China Internet ETF	7.82%	6.16%	3.51%	1.71%	0.00%	7.07%	0.29%	0.08%	3.40%	0.58%	1.19%	0.46%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both KWEB and KBUF in my portfolio?

With a correlation of 0.95, KWEB and KBUF move almost identically. Holding both adds very little diversification - you're essentially doubling your position in the same market segment. Choosing one is usually more capital-efficient.

Which is riskier, KWEB or KBUF?

KWEB has higher volatility (8.34%) compared to KBUF (3.58%). In terms of maximum drawdown, KWEB dropped -80.92% vs KBUF's -21.14%.

Which ETF is better, KWEB or KBUF?

On 1-year performance, KBUF leads with -5.80% vs -20.35% for KWEB. On fees, KWEB is cheaper at 0.70% per year. On volatility, KBUF has been the lower-risk option at 3.58%. The better choice depends on whether you care most about return, fees, risk, or income.

Which ETF has performed better, KWEB or KBUF?

Over the 1-year period, KBUF has performed better with a -5.80% return vs -20.35%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, so compare this with risk, fees, and fund exposure.

Which ETF is cheaper, KWEB or KBUF?

KWEB is cheaper with a 0.70% expense ratio, compared with 0.95% for KBUF.

Which ETF pays a higher dividend yield, KWEB or KBUF?

KBUF has the higher dividend yield at 8.45%, compared with 7.82% for KWEB.

What is the main difference between KWEB and KBUF?

KWEB is categorized as China Equities, while KBUF is Options Trading. Their fees differ too: 0.70% for KWEB and 0.95% for KBUF.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

KBUF currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (-0.44 vs -0.74), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.